Composite Ball

[Aussie-Zebra]

In our league teams provide their own balls  usually 2 1 playing ball and 2 kicking ball.

During a game on the weekend a team brought in a composite ball for a punt, the other teams coach/captain complained so the ball was replaced with a genuine leather.

Is a composite ball illegal ? The kicking team have now protested saying the rule states pebble grained leather but does not say it can't be synthetic.

Rule 1
SECTION 3. The Ball
Specifications
ARTICLE 1. The ball shall meet the following specifications:
a. New or nearly new. (A nearly new ball is a ball that has not been altered and
retains the properties and qualities of a new ball.)
b. Cover consisting of four panels of pebble-grained leather without
corrugations other than seams.

[El Macman]

Aussie,
Prior to 1993, balls of rubber or composite construction were allowed. But, in 1993 that provision was dropped from the rules. The ball must be leather.
Also, teams are not permitted to use a specific ball for kicking. They are to submit balls of play to the R before the game for approval. Once approved, only those balls may be used, but they are used at the direction of the R and U. If there is nothing wrong with the ball that is in the game, do not allow it to be changed. If it is wet, muddy, etc., fine - change it. Otherwise, leave it in the game. If it is dead near a sideline, fine - by rule, replace it with one of the other approved balls. But no team has the right to change the ball during the game.
I suppose if EVERYBODY in your league does it and they are OK with it, then, fine. But that is contrary to the rules.

[Aussie-Zebra]

Thx for the clarification El.

[busman]

And, just FYI, composite balls get "older" faster than leather, thus making them less slick and lower compression quicker.  They are also cheaper, thus their appeal to a lot of programs.

[Atlanta Blue]

And, just FYI, composite balls get "older" faster than leather, thus making them less slick and lower compression quicker.  They are also cheaper, thus their appeal to a lot of programs.

Careful, busman.  I used to work for Spalding.  We had some composite balls that were more expensive than all but our best leather balls.  And given our work with better valves, membranes and nitrogen inflations, they held their compression much longer.  Our "Neverflat" ball was guaranteed not to lose pressure for two years.  Of course, the company that bought us has virtually killed the football business anyway, but that's another story.

Expect certain composite balls to come back to the NCAA, not the cheap rubber things you may remember, but high quality balls.  In basketball, ALL NCAA games are played with composite basketballs.  Only the NBA still uses leather.  As Horveen leather availability and quality continues to decline, the price will rise enough for high end composites to come back into play.

[busman]

What we're seeing is a copy of the NFL ball that is made with composite leather.  You can get them for about $25-$30 at Academy Sports and other places. 

And, since you brought it up, the Spalding J5-V was the worst ball to kick ever made!

[Rulesman]

We have a philosophy Aussie-Zebra: the name of the game is football. All balls are kicking balls. If you want to pass it, you can kick with it. And if you want to kick it, it is also a passing ball.

[CenTexTM]

Aussie,
Prior to 1993, balls of rubber or composite construction were allowed. But, in 1993 that provision was dropped from the rules. The ball must be leather.
Also, teams are not permitted to use a specific ball for kicking. They are to submit balls of play to the R before the game for approval. Once approved, only those balls may be used, but they are used at the direction of the R and U. If there is nothing wrong with the ball that is in the game, do not allow it to be changed. If it is wet, muddy, etc., fine - change it. Otherwise, leave it in the game. If it is dead near a sideline, fine - by rule, replace it with one of the other approved balls. But no team has the right to change the ball during the game.
I suppose if EVERYBODY in your league does it and they are OK with it, then, fine. But that is contrary to the rules.

This seems to be variably enforced.  There is an AR that clearly indicates that a team could not substitute a ball on 4th down, but what about free kicks?  I vaguely recall reading something to the effect that teams can play with the ball of their choice as long as it has been approved by the R.  One crew I worked with had an R that would refuse to allow teams to kick with a ball that they referred to as their "kicking ball" even if it was not marked.  As long as there is no marking, is there any support in the rules for overruling the team's choice of an approved ball?

[El Macman]

This seems to be variably enforced.  There is an AR that clearly indicates that a team could not substitute a ball on 4th down, but what about free kicks?  I vaguely recall reading something to the effect that teams can play with the ball of their choice as long as it has been approved by the R.  One crew I worked with had an R that would refuse to allow teams to kick with a ball that they referred to as their "kicking ball" even if it was not marked.  As long as there is no marking, is there any support in the rules for overruling the team's choice of an approved ball?

You misunderstand what "choice' means. That means they may use brand/model of their choice. But, once balls are approved, they are 100% under the jurisdiction of the game officials. Only - ONLY - the R or U can authorize the replacement of the game ball during the game, and then only if warranted due to some issue with playability of the ball already in play, if it is dead in a side zone, for spotting following a measurement, etc. The teams NEVER - NEVER - have the right to even request that the ball be changed, much less insist.

[CenTexTM]

It may be that I misunderstand the word "choice" in 1-3-2-d, although more than one coach has had the same misunderstanding.  The parenthetical exception stating that the official NCAA football shall be used for championship games supports that the choice referred to by "either team may use a new or nearly new ball of its choice when it is in possession" is a choice of brand rather than specific ball.  So, as a wing official, do you send the ball back because someone on the sideline refers to it as a "kicking ball" even if the ball is not marked and is otherwise legal?  Coaches wanting to replace the ball between 1st and 2nd down is not an issue, that's clearly right out.  If you do send the ball back, what explanation do you offer coaches for refusing to use a legal ball?  I'm hoping for rule support and/or game management advice, something more authoritative than "Because I said so," and I can't seem to find a rule that supports doing so.

[NVFOA_Ump]

........  If you do send the ball back, what explanation do you offer coaches for refusing to use a legal ball?  I'm hoping for rule support and/or game management advice, something more authoritative than "Because I said so," and I can't seem to find a rule that supports doing so.

Here you go - from the 2011-2012 Rule Book, Approved Rulings, page 4:

RULE 1 - The Game, Field, Players and Equipment
SECTION 3. The Ball / Administration and Enforcement—ARTICLE 2
Approved Ruling 1-3-2
I. On fourth down, kicker A1 enters the field with an approved game ball and asks the referee to substitute it for the ball used during the previous down. RULING: Substitution of the ball is not permitted.

[clearwall]

I had some trouble with this earlier in the season. I was going by the rule definition that "THOU SHALT NOT ALLOW A KICKING BALL, SAYETH THE LORD YOUR GOD!" After seeing the practical application, however, I needed to step back and evaluate what was the intent of the rule. And the intent is that teams were putting these slicker-n-cat-excrement balls out there with no texture and usually very deflated in an attempt to either make the receiving team drop it as soon as it was touched or to add a few extra yards on scrimmage kicks.

My baseball chapter's VP has a saying, "Dont go looking for trouble, you're an official. Trouble will FIND you." If a coach wants to put in an approved ball that we deem to be fit for play, why don't we just allow it? Who can request a ball be changed? The officials, right? So if a coach comes to me, I basically take the position that, "Yeah, you know what, we kinda need a new ball." And I put it on myself that the new ball is used.  I think denying them their request is just causing unnecessary grief. Of course, if they ARE trying to sneak something in or trying to slip in an un-approved ball, then yeah, no way that's going to be played with. I just think it makes things run a bit smoother if we are more agreeable to these kinds of requests. Does it gain the team any advantage? Not really. Mostly psychological, but nothing more than that.

[NVFOA_Ump]

If your game is not impacted by field or weather conditions, and the coach (or kicker), wants to keeping swapping out the game ball with his "kicking ball" every time they kick, that's plain and simple against the rules.  That's all I need to have to back me up when I say no.  The rules are real simple here and require that the same ball they have been using during the game stay in for the kick, unless the officials make the decision that the ball needs to be swapped out.

[Atlanta Blue]

Kicking balls get into the game all the time.  Most big schools rotate balls on EVERY play, so you simply make sure the ball boy knows which ball to rotate in on 4th down.

As long as it is an APPROVED ball, no big deal.

As for the actual ball, it is NOT underinflated, if anything, it's over inflated.  An underinflated ball won't go as far.  Part of the force of the kick is the trampoline effect, the ball compressing on the foot and rebounding from that compression.  An underinflated ball will not rebound as well.  Of couse, a ball inflated like a rock won't compress to begin with, so the rebound effect is also minimized.

And punters and holders don't want a slick ball either, they have to catch it too.  In fact, a slick ball is very hard on a holder, who has to grab that ball with his hands while it is travelling very fast.  A punt returner cradles the ball against his body and doesn't rely as much on his hands alone, so the slickness isn't that big of an issue.

The BIG advantage of a "kicking ball" is that the seams have been cracked, or broken in.  A new ball has a bladder seam that runs right down the spine of the ball.  When a ball is new, the bladder seam as well as the leather seams are still "tight", and again, that trampoline effect is minimized.  Once these seams are cracked, or "broken", the ball compresses more, and therefore rebounds more off the foot.

So the only thing a kicker wants is a ball that is properly to slightly overinflated, and is broken in.  Many of these balls meet all of the requirements of rule 1-3.

[Diablo]

As for the actual ball, it is NOT underinflated, if anything, it's over inflated.  An underinflated ball won't go as far.  Part of the force of the kick is the trampoline effect, the ball compressing on the foot and rebounding from that compression.  An underinflated ball will not rebound as well.  Of couse, a ball inflated like a rock won't compress to begin with, so the rebound effect is also minimized.

The BIG advantage of a "kicking ball" is that the seams have been cracked, or broken in.  A new ball has a bladder seam that runs right down the spine of the ball.  When a ball is new, the bladder seam as well as the leather seams are still "tight", and again, that trampoline effect is minimized.  Once these seams are cracked, or "broken", the ball compresses more, and therefore rebounds more off the foot.

So the only thing a kicker wants is a ball that is properly to slightly overinflated, and is broken in.  Many of these balls meet all of the requirements of rule 1-3.

I seem to recall that some coaches would impose upon the chemistry teacher to fill a ball with helium, instead of air.  The helium-filled ball would become the "kicking ball". We all know what effect helium has on balloons.  The same principle applies to helium-filled footballs - much longer kicks.

[Atlanta Blue]

I seem to recall that some coaches would impose upon the chemistry teacher to fill a ball with helium, instead of air.  The helium-filled ball would become the "kicking ball". We all know what effect helium has on balloons.  The same principle applies to helium-filled footballs - much longer kicks.

Mythbusters (among others) proved this is not true.  The reason helium filled ballons float is that an equal VOLUME of helium is lighter than an equal VOLUME of "air".  However, footballs are filled based on pressure, not volume.  13 psi of helium is the same as 13 psi of air, and the overall weight of the ball does not change (14-15 ounces).

If you want to make a difference in how far a ball will fly, heat it up.  The leather and bladder become more pliable, and the trampoline effect is much greater than with a very cold ball that has less flexibility.

[CenTexTM]

My baseball chapter's VP has a saying, "Dont go looking for trouble, you're an official. Trouble will FIND you." If a coach wants to put in an approved ball that we deem to be fit for play, why don't we just allow it? Who can request a ball be changed? The officials, right? So if a coach comes to me, I basically take the position that, "Yeah, you know what, we kinda need a new ball." And I put it on myself that the new ball is used.  I think denying them their request is just causing unnecessary grief. Of course, if they ARE trying to sneak something in or trying to slip in an un-approved ball, then yeah, no way that's going to be played with. I just think it makes things run a bit smoother if we are more agreeable to these kinds of requests. Does it gain the team any advantage? Not really. Mostly psychological, but nothing more than that.

Philosophically, I think that's my take.  If they are apparently doing it to delay or disrupt the flow of the game, such as between downs, or right before a punt, then I think there's clear justification to refuse the substitution.  If they want to kick-off with one ball over another and both balls are legal, it seems to me that we're really stretching the rulebook to say that it's not permissible and needlessly antagonizing them.

[busman]

We have teams that will get a ball checked, it measures up, and they want to kick with it.  The problem comes after an extra point or field goal.  In some cases, they kick the ball out of the stadium, or don''t send anyoneback to retrieve it,  and want us to wait for that ball to get thrown in.  We have the ball boy lay a legal boy at the post.  After the PAT or FG, the back judge grabs that ball and that's the one we will use for the free kick.

[Diablo]

Mythbusters (among others) proved this is not true.  The reason helium filled ballons float is that an equal VOLUME of helium is lighter than an equal VOLUME of "air".  However, footballs are filled based on pressure, not volume.  13 psi of helium is the same as 13 psi of air, and the overall weight of the ball does not change (14-15 ounces).

Let's do an experiment.
Take 2 identical balloons.  Fill one with air such that the balloon is the size of a basketball.  Fill the second balloon with helium to the size of a basketball.  The balloons have equal pressures inside, otherwise they would not be the same size.  Yet, the balloon filled with helium with float easier than an air-filled balloon.  Why?  Because helium has a lower specific gravity compared to air ... about 7-fold lower.  Consequently, the helium-fillled balloon would weigh less that the air-filled balloon.  The same would be true for footballs.

If you want to take this to the next level, fill footballs with hydrogen, it's even lighter than helium.  But hydrogen has a bad side effect. 

[TxSkyBolt]

Devil,

Go to the mythbusters website. I saw the episode where they debinked that theory. Helium ball actually traveled a shorter distance.

Brad

[TxSkyBolt]

The did the experiment on the blimp hangars at Moffitt field so no wind effect.


---
I am here: http://maps.google.com/maps?ll=32.780329,-117.126658

[Atlanta Blue]

Let's do an experiment.
Take 2 identical balloons.  Fill one with air such that the balloon is the size of a basketball.  Fill the second balloon with helium to the size of a basketball.  The balloons have equal pressures inside, otherwise they would not be the same size.

Here's where your logic breaks down.  They would NOT be equal pressure.  And besides, a football is required to be between 14 and 15 ounces, no matter what you use to fill it.  14 to 15 ounces is the same weight whether you use helium or air to fill the ball.  Similar to the old riddle, which weighs more, a pound of feathers or a pound of pennies?

Besides, NOWHERE in the rules does it say balls can't be filled with helium.  It's perfectly legal to fill all of your footballs with helium, as long as you do so to about 13 psi.  If balls flew farther, why wouldn't every team simply use helium on all of their footballs?  HINT: because it make no difference. 

[Diablo]

Devil,
Go to the mythbusters website. I saw the episode where they debinked that theory. Helium ball actually traveled a shorter distance.
Brad

OK, I give in. 
Physics lives.

[Kalle]

The helium filled football is actually lighter than the one filled with air. But only about three grams, or about 0.1 ounces.

Hint to all geeks: PV=nRT

[mbyron]

Hint to all geeks: PV=nRT

Insulting to suggest that we need a hint.